> Openmoko is trying to do what can: is trying to build a phone. It is
> trying to build a running open hardware: It will not be perfect but it
> will be open. You will know all the defect and compromise token to get
> it. Then is your choose. And don't tell to me that OM hardware is
> broken
> because you know it, while other firm's hardware that keep all closed,
> are prerfect because you don't know about defects?
>
I'm fully aware that hardware companies cover their asses with
software fixups.
Thats not the issue I'm declaring, which is: please can we have some
attention to the design, so that we're not constantly chasing an
unknown. It is *important* that such things as a usable GUI, which
looks nice, are presented very, very rapidly - there is no other way
for our projects to snowball than to attract the interest of those who
will use the hardware. So far, nobody is enjoying the usability
experience, terribly much, and this is because of this attitude that
'the community will fix it'.
> In this situation there is no way to drive a community. We must to
> stop
> and to think on ourself. What we did on our phone?
I guess this is really the essence of the situation.
> I remmeber when there was the GPS/SD problem, how a lot of person
> outside OM and inside OM started to work togheter and WE did a
> miracle.
>
Sorry, its one thing to fixup the GPS/SD issue (which is still
borked), its another thing entirely to sit down before you commit any
further silicon and say "this doesn't work, it is not to our
specificaiton, we need to /design/ it better". Glamo, SD, GPS. Three
things we really do *not* want to talk too loudly about, if we want to
continue to attract developers.. and I am fairly convinced that it is
the lackadaisical attitude to the qualities of the hardware, which
would ordinarily be addressed through a *strong* design ethos, which
brought this situation about.
;
--
Jay Vaughan